Are we ready to learn from non-Muslims?

Mohammad Yazid ,  Jakarta   |  Fri, 05/09/2008 9:37 AM  |  Opinion

The death of Ahmadiyah is just a matter of time and even a miracle is not likely to change its destiny.

"Disband Ahmadiyah, No Bargaining" was the demand on one of the posters carried by Islamic Community Forum crowds at the presidential palace last Sunday. "There's no other way, the President should ban Ahmadiyah," said general chairman of the Islamic Defenders Front (FPI), Habib Rizieq Shihab, welcomed by yells of Allahu Akbar (God is Great).

Separately, president of the Prosperous Justice Party (PKS) Tifatul Sembiring said, "Ahmadiyah followers certainly don't want to go to hell. They may just be going along with what's new."

Of course, nobody wants to go to hell and all religions surely teach how to avoid it. Then why in reality is there such a hellish atmosphere prevailing among Muslims, particularly when confronted with different interpretations of Islamic teachings originating in the same Holy Koran and hadith (the Prophet Muhammad's sayings and traditions)?

On the other hand, why is a "heavenly" air, filled with peace and tolerance, apparently felt more by believers in other religions?

It is because there has for too long been a tendency toward a minimalist understanding of religion, only as a means of avoiding hell and entering heaven, rather than as a way of assimilating a spiritual outlook or leading a life in line with universal values such as justice, propriety and harmony.

Unsurprisingly, therefore, Indonesians who claim to be religious and to practice Islam daily may reflect less upon pious deeds and more upon required rituals.

Many Muslims will not like to hear what it is being said here that non-Muslims like Christians seem to put greater emphasis on the doctrine of compassion, which makes it easier for them to live a more peaceful and mature existence. Meanwhile, the doctrine of hell among Muslims seems increasingly to be the last resort to throw at those who purportedly make mistakes in understanding the teachings of Islam.

With a vision of hell as a place of torture and sadism, Islam creates the impression of a fearsome religion with men being put to the test on the doctrine of infallibility. Islam is also understood only as a black-and-white faith, while in fact numerous Islamic teachings demand spiritual comprehension or are located in theological gray areas requiring personal latitude. Such attempts at comprehending Islam will cause difficulty and be wearisome with diverse interpretations, let alone coping with the large number of Muslims still ignorant of differences of interpretation due to poor education.

Islam also teaches God's all-merciful nature in the context of the vast universe He has created, which is not to be left out of consideration. This is perhaps the most fundamental issue to be faced by Muslims, when they seek to explain why they sometimes give no impression of peace as conveyed in Islam's message.

The clamor for a ban on Ahmadiyah also shows a deadlocked dialogue between Muslim groups because both the Ahmadiyah and non-Ahmadiyah sides to the argument remain unyielding to each other. Three months ago, JAI central board leader Abdul Basit said Ahmadiyah like other Muslims recognized Prophet Muhammad as khataman nabiyyin (the concluding prophet) and Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as only a religious teacher or mursyid, who set up the Ahmadiyah Assembly.

However, in practice, the recommendation to ban the organization is based on the purported continued acceptance by Ahmadiyah communities of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as the last prophet. This is the nub of the precise difference of interpretation long existing between the two camps. Meanwhile, for quite a long time Ahmadiyahs reportedly have conducted themselves exclusively, praying only in their own mosques, not attended by other Muslims.

The best way of resolving the Ahmadiyah case is therefore to further the dialogue to the full extent of honesty, transparency and sincerity in spite of the longer time it will take.

It would be better to make the Ahmadiyah case a means of correction for Muslim society as a whole as part of ascertaining why the Ahmadiyah group is unacceptable and why the non-Ahmadiyah group refuses to accept them.

Methods like prohibition may represent the outcome of frustration in the face of conflicting views over nonreligious issues. For example, dangdut diva Dewi Persik was recently banned from performing in several places because she displayed body movements in an allegedly provocative manner while singing, which could be said to encourage immoral acts.

Dewi argued that what she was doing only served as entertainment. "My body movements constitute an art. Never link it with religion," she remarked, while apologizing to those offended while refusing the charge that she might thus cause debauchery. Whatever is done by Dewi Persik or by Ahmadiyah does not necessarily mean that people are likely to plunge into hell.

The writer is a member of The Jakarta Post's opinion desk. He can be reached at yazid@thejakartapost.com

Copyright © 2008 The Jakarta Post - PT Bina Media Tenggara. All Rights Reserved.